Want to know why California is absolutely idiotic when it comes to taxes? How about this one:

A drop in property tax revenue wallops the state, because it is obligated to make up any significant loss to the schools. The Legislative Analyst’s Office projects the state will have to pony up almost $1.5 billion to K-14 schools over the next three years to compensate for declining property taxes. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has already said the state will have to make up $430 million this year for school funding because property taxes have lagged projections.

“That $430 million in essence will get built into every year going forward,” Ross said. “More school costs will shift onto the state.”

Emphasis added by me. So if houses start losing value, the schools don’t even have to worry. The state MUST make up any funding difference. Now this might be just a question from somebody looking at things from a sane level, but if the teachers and the administrators know that they are guaranteed more money – every single fracking year – do they really have any incentive to review their operations and look for how things might be made more efficient and cost-effective?

And this tax burden goes to the state and then next year its that – plus the shortfall in property taxes next year, and the next year and the next year. Does anybody think this is a system that is setup to fail unless you have continually increasing home values? I certainly do. But even then Prop 13 doesn’t allow the government theives to re-value your house until you sell it. This was the practice that was forcing retirees and people who didn’t get 15% annual wage increases out of their homes. And, of course, the one thing that the government employees want is to get rid of Prop 13:

“Maybe we need to revisit not just Prop. 13 but our entire funding formula for local government,” he said. “As bad as it gets, that’s when it forces people to think and to move outside their comfort level and outside the box to address the crisis. Maybe we need to revisit these antiquated ways in which we deal with revenue streams to local government. At some point, it’s going to take an initiative, and it would have to be one from the people. It took an initiative for Prop. 13, and it’s going to take one again.”

In typical governmental/bureaucratic fashion, we find yet another idiot policy that was implemented – it has no apparent effect – and the answer is to keep on doing what doesn’t work:

Policies that rid Maine high schools of sugary drinks seem to have had little impact on teenagers’ overall intake of sugar-laden beverages, according to a new study.

The study compared four high schools that eliminated soda and other sugar-sweetened drinks from cafeterias and vending machines with three schools that did not take such measures.

Researchers found that over one school year, students in both groups of schools cut down on their average daily intake of sugary drinks — but there was no evidence that the school soda bans led to greater reductions.

Seems like teenagers know how to get sodas and if they aren’t present in school they still will be able to satisfy their thirst as they wish. Pretty straightforward application of logical thinking supported by research findings.

And the answer from the school ‘administrators’?

Lead researcher Dr. Janet E. Whatley Blum said she would not conclude that such school policies are “ineffective” based on these findings.

Students’ consumption of sweet drinks did go down, she told Reuters Health; the study just failed to find a statistically significant difference between schools that cut back on sweetened beverages and those that did not.

Boiled down to its essence, this answer means “we didn’t find what we wanted, but that doesn’t prove anything. We are still sure we are right”.

And some hugely interesting afterhtought seems to have come to the nanny-state researcher:

On average, the study found, students at both groups of schools curbed their intake of sugary beverages to a similar degree over the school year.

According to Blum, keeping such drinks out of teenagers’ reach during school hours may not be enough.

“School appears to be just one source of sugar-sweetened beverages for youth,” she said, “and it may be that an educational component…is needed to have an effect on consumption from sources other than school.”

Do you actually mean parents might have an influence on their children’s consumption of beverages? Knock me over with a feather.

But don’t look to find any soda dispensers in those Maine schools – ever again. Nanny has spoken and even if they have to do this study over again 1000 times, they will eventually get the results that prove what they want.

I’m sure that we will soon have multiple reports about Christian schools that are training “New Crusaders” to destroy themselves and any infidels they encounter.We wait with quiet anxiety the documentation of these evil Christians – while the Religion of Peace (TM) continues to train their children to blow themselves up.